August Pfluger: “I appreciate my colleague from Connecticut, and I think we probably have the same aim, which is to have care and access…”

“I appreciate my colleague from Connecticut, and I think we probably have the same aim, which is to have care and access to that care. For States like Texas that chose not to expand Medicaid, this rule is particularly damaging. Again, I can't stress enough how the risk of the overreach of the Federal Government will hurt those who want to access care. The proposed rule expands the authority of our State directed payments and has the ability to withhold the approval or retroactively deny already approved State directed payments. In reality, the access to care really is at stake. I agree. We are both probably talking about a similar level of access. This rule will negatively impact that. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time. Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chair, I oppose this amendment. I will make a suggestion to the gentleman that Texas ought to expand Medicaid. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Pfluger). The amendment was agreed to. Amendment No. 133 Offered by Mr. Rosendale The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 133 printed in part B of House Report 118-272.”